spiritualiter nati sint Saith St. Augustine He may upon just Cause depose discharge and put to silence any Minister whatsoever within his Dominions as to the Execution of his Ministerial function either in publick or private Ministers as well as others are under civil jurisdiction for Every Soul is bound to be subject to the higher powers And St omnis anima cur non est vestra Quis vos excepit ex universalitate If every soul then the Souls of Ministers as well as others For who excepted them from the universality Qui dicit omnem excludit nullam He that saith every Soul excludeth no Soul It was impiously said of That the Clergy ought not for any cause to be cited before the civil Magistrate or to be judged by him it being absurd that the sheep should judge the shepherd Christ himself taking upon him man's nature was subject to humance Authority submitting himself to Caiaphas and Pilate so far as to be apprehended arraigned condemned and executed True saith Bellarmine de facto Christ was subject to Pilate but de jure he ought not to have been so And that power over him which he did acknowledge was given to Pilate from above Iohn 19. 11. was onely a bare permission To which we answer if we simply respect the Dignity of Christ's person being the Son of God then we acknowledge that he neither was nor could be subject to any man But if we consider the dispensation of his incarnation and that form of a Servant which he took on himself whereby he became Man and under the Law then de jure as he was a Jew he was a Subject to that power which at that time had the rule And what Pilate unjustly did against Christ that we grant God did onely permit But he had a lawfull Jurisdiction over his person not by God's permission onely but by his effectual will But suppose it were true which Bellarmine saith yet the Example of Christ maketh never the less for the Confirmation of the truth for which I allege it For if he submitted himself to a power over him that was usurped onely and not approved of by God but barely permitted then certainly they are very far from the Humility that was in Christ Jesus that refuse to be obedient and subject to just and lawfull powers which are ordained of God and set over them And therefore when Christ said date quae sunt Caesaris Caesari give unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's he spake as well to the high Priests Scribes and Pharisees as to the People St. Paul whose apostolical authority and spiritual Weapons were able to bring down every opposition yet acknowledged that he must be judged by Caesar as his lawfull Superiour Bellarmine's distinction of de facto and de jure will stand him in no more stead here than it did before for to say the Roman Emperour was St. Paul's Judge de facto but not de jure is to doe St. Paul a manifest injury For if the emperour had no right to judge him why would he then make use of the benefit of an appeal to Caesar when no body compelled him so to doe and why did he at another time shelter himself under the Privilege of a Citizen of Rome By his very professing himself to be a Roman he doth acknowledge himself to be subject to the same Laws and to the same Lord that other Romans were and that he had no more exemption or immunity from subjection and obedience to the Roman Laws than that Tribune who said with a great sam have I obtained this freedom The Scriptures do give us an instance of King Solomon's deposing Abiathar from the Priesthood The text saith that King Solomon did thrust out Abiathar from being Priest before the Lord. Neither doth the Holy Ghost mention this historically onely as thing done but by way of approbation as a thing well and rightly done This the Iesuites themselves who are the onely men I know who question the Sovereign power in this Case confess Remarkable to this purpose are the words of one of them Alii non dubitant dicere Solomonem in eo facto injuste egisse usurpando potestatem quam non habebat ego vero id affirmare non audeo propter verba Scripturae quae ex Cap. 3. allegavi Et quia apud antiquos patres expositores non invenio factum illud inter peccata Solomonis numeratum sive in culpam tributum Some saith he doubt not to say that Solomon in that Act did unjustly in usurping more power than did belong to him But I dare not say so both for the words of the Scripture which I have before alleged out of the third Chapter and also because among the ancient Fathers and Expositours I find not this Act of his reckoned for any of Solomon's sins or him blamed for it The words which he saith he alleged out of the third Chapter are these And Solomon loved the Lord his God walking in the ways of David his Father onely he sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places Which exception saith he shews that Kings Solomon untill that time had kept the Commandments of God and consequently sinned not in that fact in deposing Abiathar And if the Kings of Israel might execute such power why not the Kings of England also Who will say that the Power of Christian Kings and Princes is shorter now than that of the Kings of Iudah and the religious Princes of the Primitive Christian Church was That the nursing Fathers under the Gospel are abridged in Authority of what they were under the Law And the reason and wisedom of this Nation in Parliament hath adjudged this to be a just Cause of such deposition and silencing of any when he shall refuse to submit and be obedient and conformable to such Laws and Constitutions as they have declared to be Very comfortable to all good People desirous to live in Christian Conversation most profitable to the State of the Realm upon which the Mercy Favour and Blessing of Almighty God is in no-wise so readily and plentifully powered as by Common-Prayer due using of the Sacraments and often preaching of the Gospel with devotion of the hearers And that nothing conduceth more to the setling the peace of this Nation which is desired of all good men nor the honour of our Religion and the Propagation thereof than an universal Agreement in the publick Worship of Almighty God Which is a thing so amiable and excellent in it self that it hath extracted an acknowledgment and commendation of it from the Mouths of the Divines of the Presbyterian persuasion themselves For in a Book of theirs entitled A Vindication of the Presbyterial Government published by the Ministers and Elders met together in a provincial Assembly November 2 d. 1649. They have these words It is the Duty of all Christians to study to enjoy the
Ordinances of Christ in unity and uniformity as far as is possible Which our Liturgy sets up by prescribing the manner of it Whereas otherwise all will be left to the chance of mens wills which saith Doctour Hammond can no more be thought like to concur in one form than Democritus's Atomes to have met together into a world of beautifull Creatures without any kind of providence to dispose them For the Scriptures call for unity and uniformity as well as purity and verity And surely it is not impossible to obtain this so much desired unity and uniformity because that God hath promised that his Children shall serve him with one heart and with one way and with one shoulder And that in the days of the Gospel there shall be one Lord and his Name one And Christ hath prayed that we may be all one as the Father is in him and he in the Father And he adds a most prevalent reason That the World may believe that thou hast sent me Nothing hinders the propagation of the Gospel so much as the division and separation of Gospel-professours If it be God's promise and Christ's prayer it is certainly a thing possible to be obtained and a duty incumbent upon all good Christians to labour after Secondly as it cannot be denyed that the Civil Magistrate hath authority over the persons of Ministers so 't is as true that he hath power to act for the regulation of all their Ecclesiastical meetings and assemblies though not to act in sacris Yet circa sacra non ad docendum quod est sacerdotale yet ad jubendum quod est regale As Constantine the Emperour told the Bishops whom he invited to a banquet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye are Bishops within the Church and I am ordained by God's Grace a Bishop without the Church That the King of England saith Sir Henry Spelman is persona mixta endowed as well with Ecclesiastical authority as with temporal is not onley a solid position of the Common Law of this Land but confirmed unto us by the continual practice of our ancient Kings ever since and before the Conquest even in hottest times of Popish fervency For this cause at their Coronation they are not onely Crowned with the Diadem of the Kingdom and girt with the Sword of justice to signisie their temporal authority but are anointed also with the oil of Priesthood and cloathed stola Sacerdotali and veste Dalmatica to demonstrate this their Ecclesiastical jurisdiction whereby the King is said to be in Law the Supremus ordinarius and in regard thereof among other Ecclesiastical rights and prerogatives belonging to him is to have all the tithes through the Kingdom in the places that are not of any Parish for some such there be and namely divers Forests Magistrates we grant can neither preach the word nor administer the Sacraments any more than Vzziah could burn incense or offer Sacrifice to God Yet they are nursing Fathers of the Church not to give the milk of the word and Sacraments but of disclipline and Government During the old Testament times the King's power extended to the instituting and commanding of such Religious meetings as do no where appear to be either instituted or commanded of God or his Servant Moses v. g. The solemnity of the Passover which was to be kept by the Law of Moses but seven days by a special Command of King Hezekiah with the consent of the people was commanded to be kept other seven days The Feast of Purim in Commemoration of the deliverance of the Nation of the Iews under Ahasuerus the Persian King was instituted by Hester and Mordecai Moses onely Commanded one day of Fasting to be yearly observed viz. in the seventh month But the Kings and Magistrates of the people instituted other yearly solemn Fasts So that in the times of the latter Prophets there were four yearly Fasts observed viz. besides that yearly in the seventh month three others in the fourth fifth and tenth month Now if they may by their authority institute and enlarge why not then as well abridge and restrain Provided the publick assembling together of God's people according to Divine appointment be no-way prejudiced or infringed If the Magistrate may appoint then he may forbid too Law reason and sense teach that appointing and forbidding belong to one power Thirdly neither can there be any ground of quarrell made against the justness of these Laws forbidding Conventicles For as it is well observed by a worthy Divine before me that Law is undoubtedly just in which there is a concurrence of the justice of these four causes of Law wherein the whole of a Law doth consist viz. the justice of the final efficient formal and material causes of Laws 1. The final Cause of End of a just Law is that it tend to the common and publick good And of this the Lawgivers are to be Judges and not the Subjects And most unreasonable it were that what the Lawgivers shall adjudge to be for the publick good should be made to yeild to private and particular mens interests 2. The efficient Cause of a just Law is the lawfull power of the person or persons in authority that made the Law Otherwise Laws are onely so in name and not indeed And as Aquinas Violentiae magis quam leges They are rather acts of violence than Laws And it is a sure rule in Logick Causa aequivoca non infert effectum a sentence passed by one that is no Judge binds not the party 3. The right form of a Law is that it be a rule of rectitude for humane actions according to the guidance of distributive justice giving to every one according to his demerits 4. The matter of a Law must be a thing that is good according to the rule of universal justice at leait indifferent A Law wherein these 4 things concur must needs be good and obligatory to all persons that are concerned in it Now in which of these the aforesaid Laws against Conventicles are faulty I know not Perhaps some will say in the latter the Matter of it is not good to lay a restraint on Religious Assemblies and Meetings It were so indeed if Religious Assemblies and Meetings were forbidden But I think it will appear in the sequel that these in question are not such whatsoever some conceive them to be It were so if all Religious Meetings or Assemblies were forbidden But blessed be God 't is otherwise We have still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the publick ancient lawfull and orderly assemblies allowed commanded and encouraged by Authority in all places of the Kingdom and onely such meetings by the Law forbidden as are private new and disorderly and tend to Faction and Schism and such other evils as are not without trembling to be mentioned Lastly I answer with that learned Casuist Dr. Sanderson that it is not necessarily requisite that whatsoever is established
to the Penalty of the Law is not that sufficient to discharge the Conscience from the guilt of disobedience Casuists that are of that Judgment say it holds true onely in those Laws whereof there are but very few in the World that are purely penal And the Laws which we now speak of are not such for these are partly Moral binding to doe or to leave undone some moral Act and partly Penal in case of Omission of what the Laws command or Commission of what the Laws forbid then to undergoe the Punishment the Laws inflict Now in these mixt Laws suffering the Penalty doth not discharge the Conscience from the guilt of sin For it is a rule of sure truth which Casuists give in such cases Omnis praeceptio obligat ad culpam Every just Command of those who have lawfull Authority to command leaves a guilt of sin upon those mens Consciences who do not obey The reason is because where a Law made by lawfull Authority requires active obedience and imposeth a Penalty in case of disobedience the Conscience of the subject stands bound primarily and intentionally to the performance of the duty therein enjoined As for the Penalty threatned that is a secondary and accidental thing to the Law added to keep up the reputation and esteem thereof in the minds of those who are concerned in it and to affright them from the neglect and disobedience of it So that though the suffering the Penalty of the Law in case of the transgression of it be as much as can be required of the Law-giver yet God by whom Kings reign and who requires subjection to Authority and that for Conscience sake will not hold such persons guiltless that doe not the things commanded in the Law The malefactour satisfies the Law at the time of his execution but who will say that without repentance of his fact the guilt of sin remains not still upon his Conscience or that he shall be acquitted at God's tribunal 5. Neither are they the Laws of the Church and Kingdom of England onely that are against such Meetings and Ministry as are in question But the godly Kings and Princes of the primitive Christian-Church have ever made the like Eusebius tells us that Constantine the Great made a Law that no Separatists or Schismaticks should meet in Conventicles and commanded that all such places where they were wont to keep their Meetings should be demolished and that they should not keep their factious Meetings either in publick places or private houses or remote places but that they should repair to their parochial Churches And in the next Chapter he saith that by that Law the memory of most of those Sectaries was forgotten and extinguished Sozomen reports that Theodosius the great decreed that the Sectaries whose petition for liberty he had first torn in pieces should not assemble together but all of them repair to their own publick Congregations otherwise to be banished their Country to be branded with some infamy and not to be partakers of Common privileges and favours with others And our neighbours and brethren of Scotland of the Presbyterian judgment did in one of their late general Assemblies since the enacting of their solemn League and Covenant make a special Canon against all private Meetings the direct tendency there of being to the overthrow of that Uniformity by them covenanted to be endeavoured in all the Churches of the three Kingdoms The very Heathens themselves by their Laws have made all such Assemblies illegitimate which the highest Authority did not cause to meet though they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to doe solemn Sacrifice to their Gods as may appear by Solon's Laws and in their practice they have shewed themselves ready to yeild obedience to their Governours in desisting from such irregular Conventions when they have been required Though Demetrius his Assembly came together disorderly and of their own heads rushed into the Theatre and there kept a shouting and Crying two hours together some one thing some another not knowing most of them wherefore they came together Yet when the Town-clark who had Authority did dismiss them they added not one fault to another but broke off their disorderly Meeting presently And they shew themselves more refractary than Demetrius himself who doe otherwise And if it be well considered the practice in question will be found to interfere with it self and to carry in the very face of it a convincing Testimony of its evil and unwarrantableness For if it be lawfull for these men to preach in private Meetings as they do and have a long time done why do they not take upon them to adventure to preach in the publick and Church-assemblies also What is it that makes them abstain from the latter and yet take liberty in the former Is it in obedience to the Law of the Land which forbids them to preach in publick The same Law forbids them to preach in private also It cannot be denied but that one is forbidden as well as the other Then this must needs be turned upon them why do they not obey in the one as well as in the other since they cannot but acknowledge that both are forbidden in the same Law surely if it were the Care and Conscience and desire to obey lawfull Authority according as Christian duty binds them that makes them silent in publick the same Conscience the same care and desire would make them sit down in silence in private also If it be said that they therefore abstain from publick preaching because it more exposeth them to the danger and penalty of the Law than private doth Then this must be retorted upon them also that their obedience is not such as God requireth for Conscience but for wrath Good men obey for Conscience but those that obey for wrath have not the fear of God before their Eyes For none contemns the power of man unless he hath first despised the Power of God And shall that be accounted by any sober Christian to be the ordinance of God or means of his appointment to beget grace in mens souls that is so repugnant to good Laws both of Church and State which we all stand bound in Conscience to observe and obey is contradictory to it self and hath in it that which proclaims to all that will open their Eyes to look into it its unlawfulness and sin God forbid ARGUMENT II. THAT cannot be the ordinance of God or means of grace that is contrary to that order which God himself by his word hath established in his Church For God is not the Authour of disorder and confusion But the Devil In the Church God's Command is for order in all things Let all things be done decently and in order And St. Paul did as well rejoice to see the order as the faith of the Church of Coloss. Onely Death and Hell have no order And it is a kind of death to a godly Christian to see